SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Cankaya University Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences / 2022 / Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 1

A Usage-Based Constructionist Approach to Evidentiality in Turkish: The Unevidentiality Construction

Türkçe’de Kanıtsallığa Kullanıma Dayalı Yapı Gramer Yaklaşımı: Kanıtsallık Yapısı

Tan Arda GEDİK
Pages
61–82
Publication Date
2022-06-06
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The results from association measures and the family of unevidentiality constructions can serve for future linguistic endeavors.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Coupled with corpora, usage-based construction grammar aims to provide cognitive plausibility for linguistic phenomena.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The paper demonstrates a superordinate and lower-level, item-specific instantiations of the construction.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results from association measures and the family of unevidentiality constructions can serve for future linguistic endeavors.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:yapı gramer · kullanıma dayalı dilbilim · Türkçe

Abstract

Coupled with corpora, usage-based construction grammar aims to provide cognitive plausibility for linguistic phenomena. In this vein, this paper combines construction grammar and usage-based approaches to analyze evidentiality in Turkish. While Turkish has been analyzed from a usage-based perspective, evidentiality has not been taken up in a usage-based constructionist approach. By using corpora, association measures, and construction as a notion and a framework, this paper defines the Unevidentiality Construction in a taxonomic space. First, it outlines its semantic properties and then it uses association measures such as faith, delta (∆) p, and ITECX to determine its usage pattern and statistical biases based on corpora. The paper demonstrates a superordinate and lower-level, item-specific instantiations of the construction. The results from association measures and the family of unevidentiality constructions can serve for future linguistic endeavors.

Özet

Derlemler ile birleştiğinde, kullanıma dayalı yapı gramer, dilsel fenomenler için bilişsel anlamda makul olmayı amaçlar. Bu bağlamda, bu makale Türkçede kanıtsallığı analiz etmek için yapı gramer ve kullanıma dayalı yaklaşımları bir araya getirmektedir. Türkçe kullanım temelli bir bakış açısıyla incelenmiş olsa da kullanım temelli yapı gramerci bir yaklaşımda kanıtsallık şu ana dek ele alınmamıştır. Derlemler, ilişkilendirme ölçüleri ve ‘yapıyı’ bir kavram ve çerçeve olarak kullanan bu makale, Kanıtsallık Yapısını taksonomik bir şekilde tanımlamaktadır. İlk olarak anlamsal özelliklerini ana hatlarıyla belirtir ve daha sonra faith, delta (∆) p ve ITECX gibi ilişkilendirme ölçütlerini kullanarak kullanım modelini ve derlemlere dayalı istatistiksel tercihlerini açıklar. Makale bu yapının üst ve alt düzey, öğeye özel örneklerini göstermektedir. İlişkilendirme ölçümlerinden ve kanıtsallık yapıları ailesinden elde edilen sonuçlar gelecekteki dilbilim çalışmalarına hizmet edebilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

GEDİK, T. A. (2022). A Usage-Based Constructionist Approach to Evidentiality in Turkish: The Unevidentiality Construction. Cankaya University Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 1, 61–82. https://ajindex.com/articles/407130

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Akkuş, Mehmet. A Usage-Based Investigation of Converbial Constructions in Heritage Speakers’ Turkish Living in the Netherlands. METU, 2019, https://open.metu.edu.tr/bitstream/handle/11511/45140/index.pdf.
  2. Aksu-Koç, Ayhan, et al. “Evidentials and Source Knowledge in Turkish.” New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, vol. 2009, no. 125, June 2009, pp. 13–28. https://doi.org/10.1002/cd.247.
  3. Aksu-Koç, Ayhan, et al. “Some Aspects of the Acquisition of Evidentials in Turkish.” Empirical Approaches to Language Typology, 2000, pp. 15–28.
  4. Altınkamış, Feyza, and Aslı Altan. “Türkçede İlgi Tümceciklerinin Edinimine Kullanım Temelli Bir Yaklaşım.” Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi, vol. 0, no. 1, July 2016, pp. 69–91. https://doi.org/10.18492/dad.47469.
  5. Arslan, Seckin, and Roelien Bastiaanse. “Tense/Aspect and Evidentiality in Narrative Speech of Turkish-Dutch Bilingual Speakers.” Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Turkish Linguistics, University of Rouen France, 2014.
  6. Atkins, B. T. Sue, and Michael Rundell. The Oxford Guide to Practical Lexicography. Oxford University Press, 2008.
  7. Backus, Ad, and Derya Demirçay. “Intense Turkish-Dutch Bilingualism Leads to Intense Turkish-Dutch Mixing: A Usage-Based Account of Increasing Integration of Two Typologically Different Languages.” Belgian Journal of Linguistics, vol. 35, no. 1, 2021, pp. 13–33.
  8. Banguoğlu, Tahsin. Türkçenin grameri. 10. bsk, Türk Dil Kurumu, 2015.
  9. Boyd, Jeremy, and Adele E. Goldberg. “Learning What Not to Say: The Role of Statistical Preemption and Categorization in a-Adjective Production.” Language, vol. 87, no. 1, 2011, pp. 55–83.
  10. Bybee, Joan. Language, Usage and Cognition. Cambridge University Press, 2010, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511750526.
  11. Bybee, Joan L. Morphology A Study of the Relation between Meaning and Form. John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1985, https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.9.
  12. Cangır, Hakan. “Lexical Associations in the L1 Turkish Mental Lexicon: Can L1 Lexical Intuition and a Representative Corpus Guide Teaching of Turkish as a Foreign Language Materials?” Dilbilim Dergisi / The Journal of Linguistics, vol. 0, no. 37, Dec. 2021, pp. 45–66. https://doi.org/10.26650/jol.2021.972166.
  13. Chomsky, Noam. The Minimalist Program. MIT Press, 1995.
  14. Cinque, Guglielmo. “A Note on Mood, Modality, Tense and Aspect Affixes in Turkish.” The Verb in Turkish, edited by Eser Erguvanlı Taylan, J. Benjamins Pub. Co, 2001, pp. 47–60. Dąbrowska, Ewa. “What Exactly Is Universal Grammar, a